Cuius regio, eius religio

In the above two graphs we witness utter contempt for the consent of the people -- over 90% of whom opposed increasing immigration and did so consistently for decades. Since such a policy replaces the people, we are justified in suspecting the contempt for their consent is secondary to contempt for the people themselves.

The elite minority relentlessly pushed this policy of immigration, admonishing the people in moral terms to "tolerate" this policy. They believed they didn't need to temper their policies until they had convinced the people that their replacement was at least morally neutral if not a moral good. As a consequence, derisively-termed "populist" movements now erupt. In response, these elites express moral outrage and contempt in the strongest possible terms -- including criminal prosecution of speech in some jurisdictions.

Such hubris is hard to understand except as quasi-religious fanaticism infecting the elite -- a religion in which contempt for the people, hence their consent, follows from the people being moral pariahs -- unrepentant sinners.

Such abject fanaticism is far beyond that necessary to demonstrate there is no such thing as "secular" authority utterly devoid of religious bias.

The sine qua non of religion is faith. Ignorance (incomplete knowledge) informs every decision. Therefore every decision implies an act, if not leap of faith. This includes official acts of government. The conceit that some actions are more rational than others is neither here nor there when it comes to deciding the boundary between secular and religious authority.

We have been here before, albeit in less existential urgency, and it bodes apocalyptic bloodshed.

Martin Luther's October 31, 1517 initiation of the Protestant Reformation set in motion decades of devastating wars in central Europe. The first decades of such wars ended in 1555 with The Peace of Augsburg. The foundation of that peace was the principle of Cuius regio, eius religio which means "whose region his religion": Sovereigns had religious authority over their respective regions.

Individuals who differed with the religion of their sovereign were then granted a grace period to emigrate to another, more compatible, sovereign's region hence religion.

More decades of war broke out when the Holy Roman Emperor tried to return to religious uniformity across all sovereignties. However the principle of regional religious autonomy, with individual choice supported by assortative migration, was ultimately victorious with the 1648 Peace of Westphalia.

Then, in 1667, England's Royal Society, quite deliberately, conspired to divide secular from religious authority. Ostensibly this was to free the advancement of the natural sciences from conflicts with religion. It is telling that The Royal Society justified this schism by pointing to the dangers of "religious enthusiasm" that had been sweeping the country. The Greek term "enthuse" means "god-within". This "god-within", according to Plato, is the source of all wisdom and has priority over reason. The Royal Society, then, was attempting to "free" science of what the Platonists saw as the source of wisdom.

However, the fault-line would eventually find its way, largely through men of the Enlightenment, such as John Locke, to do the impossible:

Divide the Individual

This pseudo-individual of the Enlightenment consisted of a natural object -- a body -- and an abstract object -- mind -- "free" of nature or any "god-within".

However across the Atlantic, nature challenged the pseudo-individual with a New World. Barely more than a century of exposure to nature's necessities led Thomas Jefferson to invoke "Nature and Nature's God" as the authority for the Declaration of Independence.

The virtue of the original intent of the United States Constitution is in its relative humility, as theocracies go, reflected in the 9th and 10th Amendments to the US Constitution. These amendments were an instauration of Cuius regio, eius religio -- reserving to the States and The People, respectively, power over all matters but those enumerated to the Federal government.

State constitutions retained powers so broad that their theocratic nature was frequently explicit. As with Cuius regio, eius religio of 2 centuries before, individual citizens had broad leeway to migrate to a compatible region. But beyond this, individuals could strike out to the frontier and found new States if they found no compatible State. A prominent example of this was the founding of the State of Utah by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, whose ecclesiastical law formed the basis of that State's constitution.

Today, the humility originally intended for the US Constitution is scarcely to be found in Washington D.C.

Moreover, religious denominations have become enthusiastic participants in the violation of the consent of the people, by establishing nongovernmental organizations to settle immigrants among the people. This enthusiasm they share with the elites. For their piety, these NGOs receive not only generous government and philanthropic grants and tax breaks, but support as the moral superiors of "populists".

It is this corruption, now pervading virtually every religious denomination, by the elites that makes obvious the need for a new church respecting Cuius regio, eius religio and its migratory assortation so that enthusiasm is not the sole possession of an elite:

A Protestant Instauration

This is the "Declaration of Independence" --"The 95 Theses" -- of The Fair Church℠.

By recognizing the "god-within" undivided from his reasoning mind The Fair Church℠ upholds the integrity of the individual's choice of faith in the form of regions that differ in religion, with enforcement of freedom of emigration to compatible regions. We can, in conscience, do no less for the mortal children of the most high.

Like the Protestant Reformation, however, conflict with existing, highly invasive, ecclesiastical powers posing as "secular" authority is inevitable.

Indeed, the mortal descendants of the immortal Goð, also known as "The People", are living under a theocracy more oppressive than the Dark Ages Catholic Church at the height of its power. The supposed "State powers" recognized by the 10th Amendment have drowned in the flood of "laws" and regulations posing as "laws" -- all backed by a gross imbalance with State powers -- powers of taxes and funds pouring out of Washington D.C.

The State militias are not under State authority, so even that last resort for nullification is -- itself -- nullified. Such pathetic efforts as the so-called "Libertarian Free State Project" cannot practically express differing beliefs

The Laboratory of the States is long-dead.

Along with that laboratory has died any substantive pretense that the so-called "social sciences" can authoritatively comment on social etiology. The "scholarship" of "sociology" more-resembles medieval theology, unhinged from experimental controls, than a science. It remains viable only as apologetics supported by the theocracy. Thus informed by intrusive theology, "policy think tanks" around Washington, D. C. unleash experimental treatments on human populations without their informed consent -- without even so much as a stage 1 clinical trial to establish safety, let alone stage 2 clinical trials to establish efficacy.

Among such "treatments" is the aforementioned massive increase in immigration from radically different cultures imposed on all locales without their consent, despite decades of consistent opposition by over 90% of the mortal Goðs.

So-violating the will of the mortal Goðs is war on Goð.

An individual, however, cannot make war on groups, such as ecclesia posing as "secular" or "scientific" government, and expect victory. It is for this reason that individuals need to unite around what the US Constitution refers to as a "Declaration of War" in self-defense. Moreover, as mortal Goðs, individuals need such a Declaration to designate a moral end. This is true whether that war is conducted by force or by the continuation of war by other "peaceful" means, such as politics.

The exegesis of The Fair Church℠'s dogma, "Accept your mortal descent from the immortal Goð." proffers such an end and "peaceful" prosecution of that war, if the original, humble, intent of the US Constitution can reign in the hubris of theocracies.

You as an individual can begin preparation.

Imagine the kind of society in which you would like to live.

Begin to formalize it verbally.

Lay down its law among those in your domain as if you were the sovereign.

Enforce it to the greatest practical extent in the largest practical domain, even if only as your domicile's "house rules".

Write it down and share it to find compatible others.

Discuss with them desirable regions for this.

Read the exegesis to see how this process applies to The Fair Church℠.

Send it, and your preferred regions to info@fairchurch.org as a proposed Fair Ecclesia.